Re: Enomaly, Inc. owns CloudCamp™ - has it jumped the shark?

1 view
Skip to first unread message
Message has been deleted

Dave Nielsen

unread,
May 27, 2009, 4:57:38 AM5/27/09
to clou...@googlegroups.com, cloud...@googlegroups.com
Hi Sam,

I've been in meetings in Los Angeles all day, flew back to Silicon Valley to attend my monthly Cloud Services SIG, and I'm only now getting home to read this email (at 1:30am). I'm too tired to respond at length at this time, but I don't want to leave your email unanswered either. So let me just say this for now ...

I was unaware of anyone (including Reuven/Enomaly) filing a trademark for CloudCamp until this email. But ... 

As I have told you directly (and many others), CloudCamp will be turned into a for-profit ... OVER MY COLD, DEAD BODY! Also, as you know, I have spent a lot of time researching the formation of CloudCamp as a non-profit (which is only fitting, since no-one has received any compensation ;-). 

My guess is that Reuven/Enomaly filed the trademark to protect it in Canada and will donate his 'trademark' to the non-profit once it is established. But this is just a guess. I will ask Reuven to confirm for all of us. But for now, I'm going to get some sleep.

Best,

Dave Nielsen
Co-founder, CloudCamp
m: 415-531-6674
skype: davenielsen
twitter: davenielsen

On Tue, May 26, 2009 at 1:05 PM, Sam Johnston <sa...@samj.net> wrote:
Enomaly, Inc. owns CloudCamp™ - has it jumped the shark?
http://samj.net/2009/05/enomaly-inc-owns-cloudcamp-has-it.html

So Reuven Cohen's company, Enomaly, Inc. effectively owns CloudCamp... you heard it here first:

Here's the backstory:

As you're no doubt already aware I recently stepped up to bring CloudCamp to Paris on 11 June 2009, which seemed like a good idea at the time and a nice opportunity to kickstart the community over here (we already have almost 100 registrations!). You also likely followed my coverage of previous Enomaly-related fiascos including the CCIF goat rodeo and appreciate that I have a very low tolerance for bulls--t in anything I'm involved with (I still can't for the life of me work out why Enomaly insists on involving itself in this stuff rather than focusing on its fledgling business). What you probably don't know is that the CCIF and CloudCamp organisations are (or at least were to be) one and the same, were it not for backlash from local organisers and my premature uncovering of the ill-fated [Open] Coud [Computing] Alliance just in the nick of time. I figured the shenanigans and tomfoolery were in the past and that we'd moved on but apparently not...

So we held our first organisers' meeting a few weeks back hit the ground running with an agenda, venue, sponsors and a handful of registrations in an Eventbrite site that we set up. As we expect a mixed audience and bearing in mind we're in Central Europe rather than the US we went for a more formal structure than usual with a combination of set talks and an "unpanel". This apparently wasn't the CloudCamp approved format so the agenda was overhauled only to be rejected by the venue and restored to something more like what we started with. The Eventbrite site was also handed over without question to Dave Nielsen, who claimed it would be better on his account for cross-marketing purposes. That was fine until we wanted to offer sponsorship slots to a few specific registrants but were denied access to our own list on the basis of a "no-spam policy" (if we can't trust our own organisers then who can we trust, bearing in mind BarCamp lists are public, albeit obfuscated). Needless to say my patience was already being tested because things I needed (documentation and a sponsorship kit) were absent while things I didn't (interference) were plentiful.

Naturally cynical and somewhat unsettled by our brushes with the self-appointed CloudCamp committee (which obnoxiously lists Reuven as "instigator" while failing to acknowledge any of the European contributors including Alexis Richardson, Chris Purrington and Simon Wardley who were equally critical to its' success, not to mention BarCamp itself on which the whole thing is based) I took advantage of being at the Cloud Computing Expos in Prague and London to discuss candidly with some of the other European organisers. Sure enough I'm not the only one who's anxious about the future (of course the future of cloudcamp is looking bright when you know you own the thing!) and it seems there is some well-earned and deep-seated distrust going around. I'm also not the only one concerned about the hard work of the many potentially resulting in the unjust enrichment of the few and my attempts to convince Dave (in a 3 hour call no less) that everyone who's ever organised or even attended a CloudCamp event is both stakeholder and benefactor have thus far fallen on deaf ears. It's becoming increasingly clear to me that the view from above is that a small group of people I've previously referred to as the Mighty Morphin' Power Rangers believe they "own" the community (more "pwn" than "own" if you ask me).

Everyone I spoke to agreed that the best way forward would be to take care of registering the trademark (something that should have been done long ago anyway), to be handed over to a suitable non-profit organisation run by elected representative(s). This mail was drafted to announce the contribution, which should really have been the end of the story:
Afternoon all,

As you know I've been active in protecting all things cloud computing w.r.t trademarks, for example:

I've just discovered the term CloudCamp is not protected and as one of a large and growing list of stakeholders (on which I include everyone from participants to organisers, sponsors and "instigators") I am concerned that we are unnecessarily (significantly) exposed. I bumped into Tom Leyden at the Cloud Computing Expo in Prague (who's organised a bunch more CloudCamps than I have) and he shares my concerns, as do a handful of other organisers I have spoken to.

As such (given the significant lead times and expenses usually associated with trademark registration) I've taken the liberty of registering the trademark with the USPTO which I will gladly transfer to a 503(c)3 non-profit, established to further the interests of cloud computing and run by elected officials. If we're not (eventually) reimbursed then Tom and I will cover the costs personally as a donation/sponsorship.

Sam
The problem was when we did a worldwide search last week with a view to registering the trademark we found that Reuven Cohen (with the help of Deeth Williams Wall lawyers) had already done so in March in the name of his own company, Enomaly, Inc. Even more curiously, when I raised the trademark issue on my recent call with Dave he knew nothing about it so either he's being taken for a ride along with the rest of us or he's telling fibs too. Naturally the excuse will be that this was done to protect the community while waiting for the formation of CloudCamp, Inc. but I don't buy it - the application curiously occurred contemporaneously with a brash attempt by a vendor to buy the whole lot and I don't believe for one second that this was a coincidence.

I don't plan to dwell on this point (I don't have the time anyway) and my primary/only concern is the ongoing viability and stability of the community we have all contributed to in some way (even if just as a participant). The last thing I want to see is a for-profit company being formed and run by self-appointed dictators only to be sold to a vendor - such a thing would be the antithesis of BarCamp, on which the group is based and whatever is setup should be structured so as to make this impossible (e.g. a non-profit democracy).

I'm not the first to accuse CloudCamp of jumping the shark, and we've seen it all before (right down to the silly puff pieces promoting individuals and obnoxious "instigator" title) when MashupCamp jumped the shark a few years back. However I believe it's not yet too late to avoid forking the community (and yes, if the organisers don't come to the party then everyone I've spoken to agrees there will be a fork) as I'm fairly sure they plan to announce the new regime they've been busy nutting out with their lawyers at the anniversary CloudCamp on 24 June 2009.

As a starting point for the "Future of CloudCamp" here's a mail I wrote at the start of the month, only to have it moderated and deleted. Let's try to work out what we need from any central CloudCamp organisation (and indeed if we need one at all) and then take it from there:
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Sam Johnston
Date: Mon, May 4, 2009 at 7:28 PM
Subject: Future of CloudCamp
To: clou...@googlegroups.com

Evening all,

There was apparently a "future of cloudcamp" call with European organisers a few weeks back and putting aside the question as to why I and the other CloudCampParis organisers I've spoken to weren't invited, was someone planning to at least post some minutes to the list?

So far as I am concerned CloudCamp is a good (albeit blatantly obvious) idea and is essentially a franchise shared between anyone who has contributed to its growth (from "instigators" to organisers to sponsors to attendees). Those of you entangled in the CCIF goat rodeo will be acutely aware of my fervour for transparency and as such I don't like having to ask for it, but I know I'm not the only one who wants to see more of it.

That in mind, by kicking off this thread I'm hoping we (the stakeholders of CloudCamp) can collaboratively and openly define the direction of the organisation. First thing's first (as I'm busy organising CloudCampParis as we speak) I'd like to get Dave some ideas as to how he can best assist local organisers. Here's some ideas to get the ball rolling:

  • Sponsorship Kit to facilitate selling of sponsorships (maybe just a PDF and/or web page explaining why it's a good idea), probably offering a basic level (@ ~ $350/€250) including mentions on the event minisite, at the event, etc. and a more advanced level including a lightning talk. For bonus points offer a "bronze" level for cashed up attendees. Details TBD but you get the idea - makes it an easier sell.
  • Branding Kit with logos, colours, PDFs, etc. which local organisers can use to have some sort of consistency (even a PDF of a sign with an arrow on it saves time).
  • Global Sponsors who commit to pay a certain amount per event (say €100-500 or around €5-20k/annum) and who get a mention on the main site and at each event for it. Currently cloudcamp.com has a laundry list of sponsors including pretty much anyone who's ever had anything to do with cloud computing and their mothers - that makes it essentially worthless and difficult to sell... bronze/silver/gold/platinum sponsors would be a better idea.
  • Organisation to take money, issue invoices, etc. but only if it's a 503(c)(3) as it's too easy to take the piss with other forms and this has significant tax advantages (read: easier to sell sponsorships and everything is cheaper). Regional organisers should be organisation members and the direction should be set by them democratically. Among other things that would save people like me having to bother our accountants about collecting money on behalf of the organisation.
  • Support in terms of joining conference calls, mailing lists and even attending the events where possible/feasible. This is a two way street though so I guess local organisers should offer accommodation/entertainment/etc. where possible to reduce costs.
  • Web Site optimised for creating and advertising individual events. This should probably be something like the Drupal CMS and organisers should be able to create and edit events without having to bother anyone else. It doesn't need to be fancy - a Wiki would probably do too (this works rather nicely for BarCamp). This is something I'd be more than happy to help out with, especially if we could get it in place quickly (in time for Paris).
I'm sure there's plenty of other things we could do but the point is to get some sort of discussion underway and get people involved in the governance rather than provide an exhaustive list.

Cheers,

Sam



Reuven Cohen

unread,
May 27, 2009, 8:24:18 AM5/27/09
to clou...@googlegroups.com, cloud...@googlegroups.com
I think the bigger question is why was Sam, someone with no directly
involved with the management or creation of CloudCamp trying to
register the trademark in the first place? Given I helped create
CloudCamp, the fact I own the trademark shouldn't be a stretch. The
reason we got the trademark at all was to protect the brand from
mis-use.

Just a reminder I also own the CloudCamp.com domain, created the
original website, host the website, created logo and branding, created
the google & linkedin groups and suggested the creation of the first
CloudCamp last June. I've never made any money off CloudCamp. I've
spent thousands of dollars of my own money because I believe in what
we're doing. I think my actions over the last year should illustrate
my intentions and a trademark doesn't change my commitment to the
continued success of CloudCamp around the globe.

Reuven Cohen
Co-Founder CloudCamp, Founder CCIF, Co-Founder Enomaly Inc

Ross Cooney

unread,
May 27, 2009, 12:24:27 PM5/27/09
to clou...@googlegroups.com
Ruv,

I want to thank you for all the work that you have put into CloudCamp.
The organisation is a credit to the whole team.

Well done, and thank you.

--
Ross Cooney
www.emailcloud.com

Rozmic Wireless Limited
16/17 Gateshead int'l Business Centre
Mulgrave Terrace
Gateshead
NE8 1AN
United Kingdom.
Tel: 0845 130 5523

Terry W. Beaver

unread,
May 27, 2009, 9:39:11 AM5/27/09
to clou...@googlegroups.com, cloud...@googlegroups.com
I suggest you speak with a trademark attorney. I can suggest a firm if
needed.

T

Sam Johnston

unread,
May 27, 2009, 2:10:13 PM5/27/09
to clou...@googlegroups.com, cloud...@googlegroups.com
Reuven,

I think the bigger question is why was Sam, someone with no directly
involved with the management or creation of CloudCamp trying to
register the trademark in the first place?

That is not at all the question - RTFA and you'll see not only is this clearly explained but a [large and growing] number of local organisers I have spoken to in Europe share my opinion... a number of them even offered to share the expense.

I also made a public commitment to transfer it "to a 503(c)3 non-profit, established to further the interests of cloud computing and run by elected officials". This is more than can be said for your childish unresponse - nobody's trying to take your toys off you; we just want to see our collective investment protected. Here's the litmus test: If you're not planning to sell us out you should have no problems following my example.

Given I helped create CloudCamp, the fact I own the trademark shouldn't be a stretch. The
reason we got the trademark at all was to protect the brand from mis-use.

I personally consider progressing back-room discussions with vendors while there's large amounts of money on the table "mis-use" and I know others who know the RealStory™ feel the same way. When even CloudCampDave doesn't know what's going on there's clearly very serious problems with "the management".

Quoting your own "Are Trademarks Harming Cloud Computing?" rant: "Trademarking encourages organizations to foster back-room deals, and negotiations to get permissions. It's almost exclusively a domain for lawyers. Does this sound familiar? [...] At the end of the day this is the key piece of the value of an our source(sic) company or community. The trademark or brand identity in many cases can be far more valuable then any direct revenue [...] Giving away free usage to your brand's trademarks would be on par with giving away the keys to the castle".

So now that you have the "keys to the castle" it's time to tell the other stakeholders and benefactors what you plan to do with them - as you are well aware, you personally have the entire community over a barrel.

Just a reminder I also own the CloudCamp.com domain, created the
original website, host the website, created logo and branding, created
the google & linkedin groups and suggested the creation of the first
CloudCamp last June. I've never made any money off CloudCamp. I've
spent thousands of dollars of my own money because I believe in what
we're doing. I think my actions over the last year should illustrate
my intentions and a trademark doesn't change my commitment to the
continued success of CloudCamp around the globe.

Thanks for the reminder - the fact that you personally own cloudcamp.com and Dave personally owns cloudcamp.org is problematic too - your public commitment should include these assets as well. In my opinion your "commitment to the continued success" is driven by a desire to cash in on it - over to you now to prove me wrong by removing temptation.

Thank you, nonetheless, for your contributions,

Sam

P.S. A $10 domain, a basic logo, a few meg of hosting space, filling out a few web forms and suggesting an [obvious] idea doesn't translate to "thousands of dollars of my own money" in my reality.

P.P.S Your claim that you've "never made any money off CloudCamp" is laughable - your name and Enomaly's logo are all over it and you've been spamming the hell out of it (see "What's the story with all the Enomaly spam in the CloudCamp group?")

Michael Wilde

unread,
May 27, 2009, 4:07:10 PM5/27/09
to clou...@googlegroups.com, clou...@googlegroups.com, cloud...@googlegroups.com
Guys.... Please respectfully pick up the phone and sort this out.  This is becoming a Valleywag article.

Thanks.  

Michael Wilde
Splunk 

Sent from my iPhone
Message has been deleted

Sam Johnston

unread,
May 27, 2009, 4:25:54 PM5/27/09
to clou...@googlegroups.com, cloud...@googlegroups.com, ti...@gawker.com
On Wed, May 27, 2009 at 9:07 PM, Michael Wilde <michae...@gmail.com> wrote:
Guys.... Please respectfully pick up the phone and sort this out.  This is becoming a Valleywag article.

Tried that numerous times... calls go unanswered. If it needs to be a Valleywag article then so be it - I'll even tip them myself (copied).

The CloudCamp community (given the number of people I've spoken to I think I'm qualified to speak on its' behalf) wants transparency and this response is as clear as concrete.

The ball's (still) in their court...

Sam

Jesse L Silver

unread,
May 27, 2009, 4:39:53 PM5/27/09
to clou...@googlegroups.com, cloud...@googlegroups.com
Sam, for the second time, this discussion belongs on cloudcamp list only.

koen...@gmail.com

unread,
May 27, 2009, 4:57:44 PM5/27/09
to clou...@googlegroups.com, cloud...@googlegroups.com
Gentlemen, after just joining the CloudCamp initiative with a huge amount of work going into organising Australia it is disheartening to see this though clearly all parties care passionately and that is commendable.

Please respect how you address each other if you insist on keeping communition public and in the open and focus on the best outcome for the CloudCamp initiative to become what you dream for it.

Regards. Carol Koenig, Sydney, Australia

Sent via BlackBerry® from Vodafone


From: Jesse L Silver
Date: Wed, 27 May 2009 13:39:53 -0700
To: <clou...@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: Enomaly, Inc. owns CloudCamp™ - has it jumped the shark?

John K. Thompson

unread,
May 27, 2009, 5:19:54 PM5/27/09
to clou...@googlegroups.com, cloud...@googlegroups.com

I am done.  Get me out of this childish loop of stupidity.

 

John






</html

Dave Nielsen

unread,
May 28, 2009, 1:57:36 AM5/28/09
to clou...@googlegroups.com
Hello everyone, 

Just like at CloudCamp, if you don't find the discussion valuable, you are encouraged to leave the room (or in this case, the forum). But please don't email the the rest of us to tell us you are leaving, especially to tell us that you don't like the unnecessary email.

To unsubscribe to this forum:
  1. visit http://groups.google.com/group/cloudcamp/subscribe 
  2. scroll to the bottom of the page and click 'unsubscribe'
Thank you and best regards to you all,

Dave

Dave Nielsen
Co-founder, CloudCamp
m: 415-531-6674
skype: davenielsen
twitter: davenielsen

pchacin

unread,
May 28, 2009, 5:26:35 AM5/28/09
to clou...@googlegroups.com
Dave

You are true. But it is also true that when someone stands up to talk in
a room (or forum) should consider some basic questions about what is
going to say:

1. It is relevant to the audience? If it is not, should the audience
leave the room or should that person recosider what is proposing?

2. Language. Been right just makes the half, saying it properly makes
the other half.

3. Timely. It is absolutely necessary to address the issue right now? is
there any urgency? Is the audience prepared to handle it?

4. Try to avoid monologues . Keep the communication bidirectional. Listen.

5.Don't take it as a personal issue. Is this really a community issue or
an inter-personal issue? Maybe a personality clash?

Don't get me wrong, I think the point is important but it should be
addressed in first instance by the involved parties and then, if
necessary by the community at large.

Finally, inviting people to leave a room is not the way to build a
community.

Regards

Pablo

Dave Nielsen wrote:
> Hello everyone,
>
> Just like at CloudCamp, if you don't find the discussion valuable, you
> are encouraged to leave the room (or in this case, the forum). But
> please don't email the the rest of us to tell us you are leaving,
> especially to tell us that you don't like the unnecessary email.
>
> To unsubscribe to this forum:
>
> 1. visit http://groups.google.com/group/cloudcamp/subscribe
> 2. scroll to the bottom of the page and click 'unsubscribe'
>
> Thank you and best regards to you all,
>
> Dave
>
> Dave Nielsen
> Co-founder, CloudCamp
> m: 415-531-6674
> skype: davenielsen
> twitter: davenielsen
>
>
>
> On Wed, May 27, 2009 at 1:07 PM, Michael Wilde <michae...@gmail.com
> <mailto:michae...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> Guys.... Please respectfully pick up the phone and sort this out.
> This is becoming a Valleywag article.
>
> Thanks.
>
> Michael Wilde
> Splunk
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On May 27, 2009, at 1:10 PM, Sam Johnston <sa...@samj.net
> <mailto:sa...@samj.net>> wrote:
>
>> Reuven,
>>
>> I think the bigger question is why was Sam, someone with no
>> directly
>> involved with the management or creation of CloudCamp trying to
>> register the trademark in the first place?
>>
>>
>> That is not at all the question - RTFA and you'll see not only is
>> this clearly explained but a [large and growing] number of local
>> organisers I have spoken to in Europe share my opinion... a
>> number of them even offered to share the expense.
>>
>> I also made a public commitment to transfer it "/to a 503(c)3
>> non-profit, established to further the interests of cloud
>> computing and run by elected officials/". This is more than can
>> be said for your childish unresponse - nobody's trying to take
>> your toys off you; we just want to see our collective investment
>> protected. Here's the litmus test: *If you're not planning to
>> sell us out you should have no problems following my example.*
>>
>> Given I helped create CloudCamp, the fact I own the trademark
>> shouldn't be a stretch. The
>> reason we got the trademark at all was to protect the brand
>> from mis-use.
>>
>>
>> I personally consider progressing back-room discussions with
>> vendors while there's large amounts of money on the table
>> "mis-use" and I know others who know the RealStory™ feel the same
>> way. When even CloudCampDave doesn't know what's going on there's
>> clearly very serious problems with "the management".
>>
>> Quoting your own "Are Trademarks Harming Cloud Computing?
>> <http://www.elasticvapor.com/2009/05/are-trademarks-are-harming-to-cloud.html>"
>> rant: "/Trademarking encourages organizations to foster back-room
>> deals, and negotiations to get permissions. It's almost
>> exclusively a domain for lawyers. Does this sound familiar? [...]
>> //At the end of the day this is the key piece of the value of an
>> our source(sic) company or community. The trademark or brand
>> identity in many cases can be far more valuable then any direct
>> revenue [...] Giving away free usage to your brand's trademarks
>> would be on par with giving away the keys to the castle/".
>>
>> So now that you have the "keys to the castle" it's time to tell
>> the other stakeholders and benefactors what you plan to do with
>> them - as you are well aware, you personally have the entire
>> community over a barrel.
>>
>> Just a reminder I also own the CloudCamp.com domain, created the
>> original website, host the website, created logo and
>> branding, created
>> the google & linkedin groups and suggested the creation of
>> the first
>> CloudCamp last June. I've never made any money off CloudCamp.
>> I've
>> spent thousands of dollars of my own money because I believe
>> in what
>> we're doing. I think my actions over the last year should
>> illustrate
>> my intentions and a trademark doesn't change my commitment to the
>> continued success of CloudCamp around the globe.
>>
>>
>> Thanks for the reminder - the fact that you personally own
>> cloudcamp.com <http://whois.domaintools.com/cloudcamp.com> and
>> Dave personally owns cloudcamp.org
>> <http://whois.domaintools.com/cloudcamp.org> is problematic too -
>> your public commitment should include these assets as well. In my
>> opinion your "commitment to the continued success" is driven by a
>> desire to cash in on it - over to you now to prove me wrong by
>> removing temptation.
>>
>> Thank you, nonetheless, for your contributions,
>>
>> Sam
>>
>> P.S. A $10 domain, a basic logo, a few meg of hosting space,
>> filling out a few web forms and suggesting an [obvious] idea
>> doesn't translate to "/thousands of dollars of my own money/" in
>> my reality.
>>
>> P.P.S Your claim that you've "/never made any money off
>> CloudCamp/" is laughable - your name and Enomaly's logo are all
>> over it and you've been spamming the hell out of it (see "What's
>> the story with all the Enomaly spam in the CloudCamp group?
>> <http://www.linkedin.com/groupAnswers?viewQuestionAndAnswers=&gid=122638&discussionID=2709816&sik=1243447548548>")
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
> >


--
========================================================================
0 0 0 Pablo Chacin | Dept. d'Arquitectura de Computadors
0 0 0 e-mail: pch...@ac.upc.edu | UPC-Campus Nord. Modul D6-212
0 0 0 phone: +34 +93 405 4059 | Jordi Girona, 1-3
U P C fax: +34 +93 401 7055 | 08034 Barcelona - SPAIN
www: http://personals.ac.upc.es/pchacin
========================================================================

Ray LaDriere

unread,
May 28, 2009, 8:10:47 AM5/28/09
to clou...@googlegroups.com

This isn’t about a trademark, most of this message is about the sender.  I not really interested in how great he is.  As long as cloud camp suits my purpose I will be involved.

 

From: clou...@googlegroups.com [mailto:clou...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Sam Johnston
Sent: Tuesday, May 26, 2009 3:05 PM
To: CloudCamp
Subject: Enomaly, Inc. owns CloudCamp™ - has it jumped the shark?

 

Enomaly, Inc. owns CloudCamp™ - has it jumped the shark?

Ray LaDriere

unread,
May 28, 2009, 8:13:17 AM5/28/09
to clou...@googlegroups.com, cloud...@googlegroups.com

This isn’t about cloudcamp – it’s about Sam’s inflated ego as  our protector…. Personally I don’t need a protector.  When cloudcamp stops being beneficial we will stop being involved.

 

From: clou...@googlegroups.com [mailto:clou...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Jesse L Silver


Sent: Wednesday, May 27, 2009 3:40 PM
To: clou...@googlegroups.com
Cc: cloud...@googlegroups.com

Sam Johnston

unread,
May 28, 2009, 10:23:38 AM5/28/09
to clou...@googlegroups.com, cloud...@googlegroups.com
G'day Ray,

Thanks for sharing your thoughts - this is the first I've heard from anyone at Dell since I derailed the attempt to trademark cloud computing last year and I was starting to feel unloved.  I appreciate that there's still going to be some bitterness, but is a vicious ad hominem attack from a personal account almost a year later really necessary? No, I thought not.

I've received countless thanks from local organisers for drawing attention to this issue before it was too late to do anything, as I did last year when I avoided a Netbook style showdown over the term "cloud computing" itself. It's unfortunate that it had to be done this way but when you're dealing with these kinds of people you don't have so many options.

Kind regards,

Sam

Umit D. Sami

unread,
May 28, 2009, 2:46:05 PM5/28/09
to clou...@googlegroups.com, clou...@googlegroups.com
Dave,

I enjoy the collaboration and the level of entusiasm among clould camp participants. I also had an opportunity to attend clouldcamp event in nyc. It was great.  I cant wait for the next one.  So thank you again for setting up clouldcamp and running the show all around the world. This is a great way to exchang ideas, built networks and promote saas/clould technologies, etc.  The future of IT is indeed hidden in the clould.  some individuals do not like the idea. Adaptation of revolutionary concepts like clould computing will take a long time and involves few bumps and banana peels along the way.  

Best wishes, 

Umit D. Sami
Founder & CEO
GLOIT Inc.
Cell:    (516) 551-6599

Ray LaDriere

unread,
May 28, 2009, 8:11:07 PM5/28/09
to clou...@googlegroups.com, cloud...@googlegroups.com

The opinions I have expressed earlier in this thread are solely my own, originate from my own email and have no relation with my employer, which Sam has so cleverly discovered is Dell.  I have not intended to represent Dell nor am I authorized to speak publically on Dell’s behalf.  I have no knowledge of the facts surrounding the events attributed to my employer herein, and as such have no opinion I can represent publically.  My discussion was solely regarding Cloudcamp trademarks and Enomaly

 

Regards.

Ray LaDriere

Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages